Running head: Case Brief 1 Case Brief 4 Case Brief University Affiliation Student’s name Kent V United States 383 US 541 (1966). Retrieved from https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5405024647930835755&q=Kent+V+United+States+383+US+541+(1966)+&hl=en&as_sdt=8006 Facts of the case In Kent v. United States the court made a ruling on the due process of juvenile offenders. In this particular case, 16 year old Morris Kent was detained and interrogated by Washington, D.C. police officers regarding robberies and other crimes he had committed (Gardner, 1966). The crimes included housebreaking, robbery and rape. Through the interrogation, Kent agreed to commit some of the crimes mentioned by the police officers. Kent was only 16 years old hence his mother hired an attorney to help Ken out through his trial. Due to his age, Kent was brought before a juvenile court for a series of pretrial issues. Instead of the court having its jurisdiction, it waived it; that is, the judge gave up the court’s authority to make legal decisions in Kent’s case. After this scenario, Kent was tried in an adult court since the juvenile court waived its jurisdiction. Kent was later convicted and sentenced. The Kent Court, however, limited the responsibilities of the trial court: "We do not read the statute as requiring that this statement must be formal or that it should necessarily include conventional findings of fact. Issues Was it within the power of the Court of Appeal to just make a trial for Kent at Juvenile court? They Court of Appeal had a waiver without full investigation on Kent’s case. Kent was interrogated by the police with no counsel present. The court did not consider reports by social services, court staff or probation section (since Kent was already on probation) The Juvenile Court Act under which the D.C. juvenile judge was acting, allowed waiver to adult court if the person was at least 16 and charged with an offense that would be a felony if done by an adult. Could be done based on a “full investigation” by the juvenile judge. Kent appealed from the order of waiving his case to adult criminal court-District Columbia Courts denied his appeals. Decisions The Supreme Court held that the juvenile court's waiver of its jurisdiction in Kent's case was invalid. In reaching this conclusion, the Supreme Court determined that the juvenile court failed to properly investigate whether Kent should be tried in juvenile court or tried as an adult. Reasoning A jury found Kent guilty and sentenced him to serve 30-90 years in prison. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed, although it noted that the juvenile court judge provided no reason for the waiver. Petitioner's counsel filed a motion in the Juvenile Court for a hearing on the question of waiver, and for access to the Juvenile Court's Social Service file which had been accumulated on petitioner during his probation for a prior offense. Separate opinions Th ...

1. Running head: Case Brief 1
Case Brief 4
Case Brief
University Affiliation
Student’s name
Kent V United States 383 US 541 (1966). Retrieved from
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=54050246479308
35755&q=Kent+V+United+States+383+US+541+(1966)+&hl=e
n&as_sdt=8006
Facts of the case
In Kent v. United States the court made a ruling on the due
process of juvenile offenders. In this particular case, 16 year
old Morris Kent was detained and interrogated by Washington,
D.C. police officers regarding robberies and other crimes he had

2. committed (Gardner, 1966). The crimes included housebreaking,
robbery and rape. Through the interrogation, Kent agreed to
commit some of the crimes mentioned by the police officers.
Kent was only 16 years old hence his mother hired an attorney
to help Ken out through his trial. Due to his age, Kent was
brought before a juvenile court for a series of pretrial issues.
Instead of the court having its jurisdiction, it waived it; that is,
the judge gave up the court’s authority to make legal decisions
in Kent’s case. After this scenario, Kent was tried in an adult
court since the juvenile court waived its jurisdiction. Kent was
later convicted and sentenced. The Kent Court, however, limited
the responsibilities of the trial court: "We do not read the
statute as requiring that this statement must be formal or that it
should necessarily include conventional findings of fact.
Issues
Was it within the power of the Court of Appeal to just make a
trial for Kent at Juvenile court? They Court of Appeal had a
waiver without full investigation on Kent’s case. Kent was
interrogated by the police with no counsel present. The court
did not consider reports by social services, court staff or
probation section (since Kent was already on probation) The
Juvenile Court Act under which the D.C. juvenile judge was
acting, allowed waiver to adult court if the person was at least
16 and charged with an offense that would be a felony if done
by an adult. Could be done based on a “full investigation” by
the juvenile judge. Kent appealed from the order of waiving his
case to adult criminal court-District Columbia Courts denied his
appeals.
Decisions
The Supreme Court held that the juvenile court's waiver of its
jurisdiction in Kent's case was invalid. In reaching this
conclusion, the Supreme Court determined that the juvenile
court failed to properly investigate whether Kent should be tried
in juvenile court or tried as an adult.
Reasoning
A jury found Kent guilty and sentenced him to serve 30-90

3. years in prison. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit affirmed, although it noted that the juvenile
court judge provided no reason for the waiver. Petitioner's
counsel filed a motion in the Juvenile Court for a hearing on the
question of waiver, and for access to the Juvenile Court's Social
Service file which had been accumulated on petitioner during
his probation for a prior offense.
Separate opinions
The Court's ruling ushered in an era of reform in the juvenile
legal system that granted increasing constitutional protections
to minors.
Analysis
The Supreme Court explained that the juvenile court had an
obligation to properly investigate whether it should waive its
jurisdiction as a matter of due process. Due process is a
constitutional guarantee of a fair process promised to every
criminal defendant. The Supreme Court reasoned that Kent , as
a juvenile, was entitled to the same level of due process as any
other criminal defendant.
Cyber-bullying
Due: Midnight Sunday of Unit 5

4. This assignment exposes students to Cyber-bullying. In this
assignment, students are
asked to view a video on cyber bullying and respond to two
questions related to their
jurisdiction’s response and laws that are related to cyber
bullying. Students are also
asked to identify and discuss initiatives that their school system
has instituted to
address the issue. After responding to the questions, students
are asked to give their
analysis as to whether the feel enough is being done to address
the issue, what
changes they would make to the law, and how they would
respond as a parent.
Part 1: Answer the following questions:
1. What steps have been taken in your own jurisdiction to
address cyber-bullying?
In your answer, include and cite current laws that have been
enacted to address
this issue.
2. Identify and discuss school initiatives that address the issue
of bullying in
schools.

5. Answers must be at least 250 words.
Part 2: Watch the video on Cyberbullying in the Unit 5
Readings and Resources
After watching the video and answering the bullying questions
in Part 1 (above), what
are your thoughts? Include:
1. Is enough being done to address the issue?
2. What changes would you make in the law?
3. As a parent, how would you handle the situation if your child
was
Your analysis must be at least 250 words.
The requirements for your paper are:
(minimum) analysis
(500 words total).
font, APA formatting.

6. be evaluated
before you write the paper and again after you write your paper.
Unit 5 Assignment
CRJ 201 – Juvenile Justice
Grading Rubric
Criteria Needs
Improvement
Average Exemplary Points
Earned
0 - 4 Points 5 – 7 Points 8 - 10 Points Total
Cyberbullying
questions
Questions not
address or
inadequately
addressed. Did
not cite the
current laws in
your jurisdiction.
Addressed
questions and
cited the current

7. laws in your
jurisdiction but
missing some
key detail.
Fully addressed
questions and cited
the current laws in
your jurisdiction.
0 - 4 Points 5 - 7 Points 8 - 10 Points
Analysis Did not address or
inadequately
addressed
whether enough is
being done. Did
not suggest
changes to the
law
Addressed
whether enough
is being done
and suggested
changes but
missing some
key detail.
Addressed whether
enough is being
done and
suggested changes
in full detail.

8. 0 - 4 Points 5 - 7 Points 8 - 10 Points
Parental
perspective
Did not address,
or inadequately
addressed how
you would handle
the situation if
your child was 1.
victim and 2.
Perpetrator.
Addressed how
you would
handle the
situation if your
child was 1.
victim and 2.
perpetrator but
missing some
key detail.
Fully addressed
how you would
handle the situation
if your child was 1.
victim and 2.
perpetrator.
0 - 1 Points 2 - 3 Points 4 - 5 Points

9. Clear and
professional
writing and
format;
length
requirements
Errors impede
professional
presentation;
guidelines not
followed; Length
requirements not
met
Few errors that
do not impede
professional
presentation;
Length
requirements
partially met
Writing and format
is clear,
professional, APA
compliant, and error
free; Length
requirements fully
met
TOTAL: /35

10. Due: In stages (Units 1-7), with final completed project due
Thursday of Unit 8
The final paper will be a formal research paper, therefore, it
should meet all the APA
format requirements including title page, running head, abstract,
citations, and works
cited formalities as well as all other APA criteria. Your
culminating paper should contain
all the elements of a research paper in APA format including
Title Page, Body of the
Paper, and Reference page. Through your analysis of the subject
you should
demonstrate your understanding of the concepts studied
throughout the term by
incorporating facts about the juvenile justice system and the
societal impact of the topic
you have chosen for your final paper.
Topic for Final Project
The topic for your final paper should be chosen and approved
by your instructor during

11. Unit 1. Your topic should be an issue in juvenile justice that
interests you. A good place
to start looking for topics is the index of your textbook.
Technical Requirements of the Final Projects
Project Length and Due Date - The body of the paper must be at
least six (6) pages,
double spaced, exclusive of the title page, abstract, and
references. The title page must
include the following information: paper title, name of student,
course number and title,
and date. The paper must be submitted in APA Style which
means the margins are set
at 1” on all sides of the page and that you use Times New
Roman 12 point font. Citation
format, running heads, works cited, and all other technical
aspects of APA Style are
factored into grade.
The final project will be due on Thursday of Unit 8.
Grading
The papers will be graded on accuracy of content, quality of
writing, originality of

12. thought, completeness, grammar, formatting, technical
accuracy, and compliance with
APA style. You will also be assessed for adherence to the
requirements of the project
as listed above. Failure to meet any of the requirements will
result in a loss of points.
Please use reliable sources for your paper, and be sure to write
the paper in your own
words. Wikipedia is not a valid academic resource. Where
citations are made, you
should follow the APA Style Manual for both internal citations
and footnotes. The
abstract does not count towards the page count for the body of
the paper. Make sure
Final Course Project
CRJ 201 – Juvenile Justice
you are accurately paraphrasing your sources and not just
copying blocks of text from
the Internet. Simply putting a citation at the end of a paragraph
you have copied is not
sufficient. If you do not understand how to quote, paraphrase
and cite sources, you

13. should plan on having the writing center evaluate your work
prior to submitting it for
grading. Also, please include your sources at the end of the
paper on a Works Cited
page as required by APA Format.
Midnight, Sunday of Unit 1: Final Project Proposal submitted
(1-2 points).
Midnight, Sunday of Unit 2: Title page for Final Project with
running header and 1 page
introduction (1-2 points).
Midnight, Sunday of Unit 3: Bibliography for Final Project with
3 properly cited sources,
each with a brief summary. (1-2 points)
Midnight, Sunday of Unit 4: Bibliography for Final Project with
3 more properly cited
sources, each with a brief summary. (1-2 points)
Midnight, Sunday of Unit 5: Bibliography for Final Project with
2 more properly cited
sources, each with a brief summary. (1-2 points)
Midnight, Sunday of Unit 6: Bibliography for Final Project with
2 more properly cited

14. sources, each with a brief summary. (1-2 points)
Midnight, Sunday of Unit 7: Abstract for Final Project (1-2
points).
Midnight, Thursday of Unit 8: Final Project – The completed
final project is due (see
next page for grading criteria for grading of content) – the body
of the paper should
include at least six (6) pages, double spaced, exclusive of the
title page, abstract, and
references (86 points).
TOTAL: 100 points
Refer to the grading rubric on the next page.
Be sure to read the grading criteria by which your paper will be
evaluated before
you write the paper and again after you write your paper.

15. Grading Rubric for Final Paper
CRITERIA Deficient
Proficient to
Development
Needed
Exemplary
to Proficient
Points
Earned
(X Pts.)
0-1 points 2-3 points 4-5 points
1. Format/Layout
Presentation of the
text
Structuring of text.
Follows
requirements of
length, font and style
Follows poorly
the requirements
related to format
and layout.
Follows, for the

16. most part, all the
requirements
related to format
and layout.
Some
requirements are
not followed.
Closely follows
all the
requirements
related to format
and layout.
0-1 points 2-3 points 4-5 points
2 APA styles –
technical accuracy
(Complete APA
Style Guideline is
located under
Course Information)
Errors in APA
style detract
substantially
from the paper.
Word choice is
informal in tone.
Writing is
choppy,
with awkward or
unclear
passages.

17. Rare errors in
APA style that do
not detract from
the paper.
Scholarly style.
Writing has
minimal awkward
of unclear
passages.
No errors in APA
style. Scholarly
style. Writing is
flowing and easy
to follow
0-1 points 2-3 points 4-5 points
3 Spelling and
grammar
Grammatical
errors or spelling
& punctuation
substantially
detract from the
paper.
Very few
grammatical,
spelling or
punctuation
errors interfere
with reading the

18. paper.
The paper is free
of grammatical
errors and
spelling
& punctuation.
0-8 points 9-19 points 20-24 points
4 Accuracy of
content/information
All elements of the
topics are
addressed.
The information is
technically sound.
The essay is not
objective and
addresses poorly
the issues
referred in the
proposed topic.
The provided
The essay is
objective and for
the most part
addresses with
an in depth
analysis most of
the issues
The essay is

19. objective and
addresses with
an in depth
analysis all the
issues referred in
the proposed
Information based
on careful research.
Coherence of
information.
information is not
necessary or not
sufficient to
discuss these
issues.
referred in the
proposed topic.
The provided
information is, for
the most part,
necessary and
sufficient to
discuss these
issues.
topic. The
provided
information is
necessary and

20. sufficient to
discuss these
issues.
0-8 points 9-19 points 20-24 points
5 Quality of writing The essay is not
well written, and
contains many
spelling errors,
and/or grammar
errors and/or use
of English errors.
The essay is
badly organized,
lacks clarity
and/or does not
present ideas in
a coherent way.
The essay is well
written for the
most part,
without spelling,
grammar or use
of English errors.
The essay is for
the most part
well organized,
clear and
presents ideas in
a coherent way.
The essay is well
written from start
to finish, without

21. spelling,
grammar or use
of English errors.
The essay is well
organized, clear
and presents
ideas in a
coherent way.
0-8 points 9-20 points 21-23 points
6 Originality of
thought
Did not
demonstrate
originality of
thoughts and
ideas in writing.
Some original
ideas and
thoughts
conveyed in
writing.
Original ideas
and thoughts
conveyed in
writing.
Total points /86

22. Case brief on In re Winship, 397 US 358 - Supreme Court 1970
Due: Midnight Sunday of Unit 3
The significance of this landmark juvenile case deals with
juveniles’ due process rights
and proof beyond a reasonable doubt. This case forced the
Supreme Court to rule
juveniles are entitled to the same due process rights and proof
beyond a reasonable
doubt standard given to adults.
Read the In re Winship, 397 US 358 - Supreme Court 1970 case
(https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14966781063535
213924&q=+In+Re+
Winship+Case&hl=en&as_sdt=8006). You may also research
the case.
Brief the case using the 7-step outline in Briefing Court Cases
(http://www.lib.jjay.cuny.edu/research/brief.html)

23. -word summary of
the case that
includes the issue the Supreme Court was asked to decide on.
-word analysis of
the decision and
include your opinion.
your case brief
assignment. Your analysis is the most important part of this
assignment.
The requirements for your paper are:
formatting.
ing criteria by which your paper will
be evaluated
before you write the paper and again after you write your paper.
Unit 3 Case Brief & Rubric
CRJ 201– Juvenile Justice
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14966781063535
213924&q=+In+Re+Winship+Case&hl=en&as_sdt=8006
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14966781063535
213924&q=+In+Re+Winship+Case&hl=en&as_sdt=8006

24. http://www.lib.jjay.cuny.edu/research/brief.html
Grading Rubric
Criteria Needs
Improvement
Average Exemplary Points
Earned
0 - 1 Points 2 - 3 Points 4 - 5 Points
Title and
citation
Case name and
citation missing or
many errors.
Identifies case
name and
citation with
some errors.
Identifies case
name and citation
in the correct
format.
0 - 1 Points 2 - 3 Points 4 - 5 Points
The facts Missing relevant

25. facts in the case.
Many errors in
connecting the
facts to the rule in
accord with the
opinion.
Includes most
relevant facts in
the case.
Reasoning
logically
connects the
facts to the rule
in accord with
the opinion but
with some
errors or
missing some
key detail.
Includes all relevant
facts in the case
and the reasoning
logically connects
the facts to the rule

26. in accord with the
opinion.
0 - 4 Points 5 - 10 Points 11 - 15 Points
The issue Issue not
identified or
incorrectly
identified and is
not stated in the
form of a
question.
Issue identified
but with some
errors or
missing some
key detail. Issue
is stated in the
form of a
question.
Issue correctly
identified and is
stated in the form of
a question.
0 - 4 Points 5 - 10 Points 11 - 15 Points

27. Decisions or
Holding
Court’s decision
not identified or
inadequate; and
relevant aspects
of the decision not
identified or
inadequate.
Identified court’s
decision and
identified the
relevant aspects
of the decision
but missing
some key detail
or with some
Properly identified
court’s decision and
identified the
relevant aspects of
the decision.
errors.
0 - 4 Points 5 - 10 Points 11 - 15 Points
Reasoning
or Rationale

28. Reasons that the
court used in
reaching its
decisions,
including what
rules of law
applied missing or
inadequate.
Listed reasons
that the court
used in
reaching its
decisions,
including what
rules of law
applied but
missing some
key detail.
Properly listed the
reasons that the
court used in
reaching its
decisions, including
what rules of law
applied.
0 - 1 Points 2 - 3 Points 4 - 5 Points
Separate
Opinions
Other opinions in

29. agreement with
the decision and
any dissenting
opinions missing
or inadequate.
Identified other
opinions in
agreement with
the decision and
any dissenting
opinions but
missing some
key detail.
Properly identified
other opinions in
agreement with the
decision and any
dissenting opinions.
0-23 Points 24-31 Points 32 - 35 Points
Analysis Evaluation of the
significance of the
case and what is
important about
the decision
missing or
inadequate.
Student’s opinion
missing or
inadequate.
Evaluated the

30. significance of
the case and
what is
important about
the decision but
missing some
key detail.
Included is
student’s
opinion.
Properly evaluated
the significance of
the case and what
is important about
the decision.
Included is
student’s opinion.

31. 0 - 1 Points 2 - 3 Points 4 - 5 Points
Clear and
professional
writing and
format
Errors impede
professional
presentation;
guidelines not
followed
Few errors that
do not impede
professional
presentation
Writing and format
is clear,
professional, APA
compliant, and error
free
Total Points: /100

32. Case brief on McKeiver v. Pennsylvania 403 US 528 (1971)
Due: Midnight Sunday of Unit 2
McKeiver v. Pennsylvania 403 US 528 (1971) involves the
application of due process to
a juvenile court proceeding and discusses juveniles right to a
jury trial.
Read the McKeiver v. Pennsylvania 403 US 528 (1971) case
(https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=38244667319584
41831&q=McKeiver+
v.+Pennsylvania+403+US+528+(1971)&hl=en&as_sdt=6,33).
You may also research
the case.
Brief the case using the 7-step outline in Briefing Court Cases
(http://www.lib.jjay.cuny.edu/research/brief.html)
-word summary of
the case that
includes the issue the Supreme Court was asked to decide on.
-word analysis of
the decision and
include your opinion.
the criteria on the grading rubric to get full credit for
your case brief
assignment. Your analysis is the most important part of this
assignment.
The requirements for your paper are:

33. ouble spaced, Times New Roman 12 pt. font, APA
formatting.
be evaluated
before you write the paper and again after you write your paper.
Unit 2 Case Brief & Rubric
CRJ 201 – Juvenile Justice
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=38244667319584
41831&q=McKeiver+v.+Pennsylvania+403+US+528+(1971)&hl
=en&as_sdt=6,33
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=38244667319584
41831&q=McKeiver+v.+Pennsylvania+403+US+528+(1971)&hl
=en&as_sdt=6,33
http://www.lib.jjay.cuny.edu/research/brief.html
Grading Rubric
Criteria Needs
Improvement
Average Exemplary Points
Earned
0 - 1 Points 2 - 3 Points 4 - 5 Points

34. Title and
citation
Case name and
citation missing or
many errors.
Identifies case
name and
citation with
some errors.
Identifies case
name and citation
in the correct
format.
0 - 1 Points 2 - 3 Points 4 - 5 Points
The facts Missing relevant
facts in the case.
Many errors in
connecting the
facts to the rule in
accord with the
opinion.
Includes most

35. relevant facts in
the case.
Reasoning
logically
connects the
facts to the rule
in accord with
the opinion but
with some
errors or
missing some
key detail.
Includes all relevant
facts in the case
and the reasoning
logically connects
the facts to the rule
in accord with the
opinion.
0 - 4 Points 5 - 10 Points 11 - 15 Points
The issue Issue not
identified or
incorrectly
identified and is
not stated in the
form of a

36. question.
Issue identified
but with some
errors or
missing some
key detail. Issue
is stated in the
form of a
question.
Issue correctly
identified and is
stated in the form of
a question.
0 - 4 Points 5 - 10 Points 11 - 15 Points
Decisions or
Holding
Court’s decision
not identified or
inadequate; and
relevant aspects
of the decision not
identified or
inadequate.
Identified court’s
decision and
identified the

37. relevant aspects
of the decision
but missing
some key detail
or with some
Properly identified
court’s decision and
identified the
relevant aspects of
the decision.
errors.
0 - 4 Points 5 - 10 Points 11 - 15 Points
Reasoning
or Rationale
Reasons that the
court used in
reaching its
decisions,
including what
rules of law
applied missing or
inadequate.
Listed reasons
that the court
used in
reaching its

38. decisions,
including what
rules of law
applied but
missing some
key detail.
Properly listed the
reasons that the
court used in
reaching its
decisions, including
what rules of law
applied.
0 - 1 Points 2 - 3 Points 4 - 5 Points
Separate
Opinions
Other opinions in
agreement with
the decision and
any dissenting
opinions missing
or inadequate.
Identified other
opinions in
agreement with
the decision and
any dissenting
opinions but
missing some
key detail.

39. Properly identified
other opinions in
agreement with the
decision and any
dissenting opinions.
0-23 Points 24-31 Points 32 - 35 Points
Analysis Evaluation of the
significance of the
case and what is
important about
the decision
missing or
inadequate.
Student’s opinion
missing or
inadequate.
Evaluated the
significance of
the case and
what is
important about
the decision but
missing some
key detail.

40. Included is
student’s
opinion.
Properly evaluated
the significance of
the case and what
is important about
the decision.
Included is
student’s opinion.
0 - 1 Points 2 - 3 Points 4 - 5 Points
Clear and
professional
writing and
format
Errors impede
professional
presentation;
guidelines not
followed.
Few errors that

41. do not impede
professional
presentation.
Writing and format
is clear,
professional, APA
compliant, and error
free.
Total Points: /100